Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

You might also be interested in “Ken Smith on the David Jang Controversy” Jan 23 at blog “Internet Monk” which, its website explains, was run until he died by Michael Spencer, but is continued now by his request and his friend, “Chaplain Mike” who I gather (from the sidebar) has some interest in things Anglican.  Ken Smith (as a guest blogger here) writes how Olivet University in SF took over their “Bethany University” and as concerned alumni, they began to look into who was bailing it out of its financial troubles. (FYI, that’s also a repeating theme in the Unification church involvement in right-wing American Christianity).

Note from CM: Ken Smith is an independent journalist from Washington state who was gracious enough to send us a post on a subject we thought might be of interest to iMonk readers. In September 2012, he teamed up with Ted Olsen at Christianity Today to publish two articles on what they called “The Second Coming Christ Controversy.” Here are the links to those articles:

• The Second Coming Christ Controversy
• The Second Coming Christ Controversy: More Leaders Speak Out

Ken has also written about the subject of these articles, David Jang, on his blog: Confessions of a Would-Be Theologian. I’m grateful for this update for our readers. Thanks also to Dan Jepsen, who contacted Ken and facilitated getting today’s post for IM. (that’s the blog administrator’s intro…)

… those concerned quickly ran into conflicting assessments of who was this group, and David Jang.   I find it distressing, if not a little painful, to witness Christians at the Crossroads over what is and is not orthodox, looking for authoritative endorsements.  I already went to the tax returns, the filings, which are clearly “unorthodox” (some more below), let alone any theology:

Those alumni who still felt close to the school were naturally curious about Bethany’s new owners, and a few of us started digging around. One person described them as “a bunch of rich Korean Pentecostals,” and that naturally piqued our interest. How many of those are there in the world?

The school’s website was helpful. Olivet University, we read, was associated with the Evangelical Assembly of Presbyterian Churches, and was founded in 2000 by a man named David Jang, a Korean pastor and theologian. OK, fine. But who is David Jang? Back to Google.

This is where it all turned unexpected. Because the first thing we turned up was some Japanese blog dedicated to proving that David Jang was the leader of a dangerous cult whose members believed he was some sort of “Second Coming Christ”. And then another Japanese blog dedicated to proving that the author of the first blog was himself a dangerous nut-job…

…Here comes the rationalization:

 But it was clear there wasn’t really any chance that the “Second Coming Christ” accusations could be true. After all, Olivet’s denomination, the EAPC, was a member of the World Evangelical Alliance, a reputable organization that in one form or another went back to the mid 1800’s. Olivet’s president, William Wagner, was a lifelong Southern Baptist missionary, and was once even a candidate for president of the SBC. I even tracked down and talked to the pastor at one of their churches, Paul de Vries, a former professor of ethics at Wheaton. You simply don’t get those kinds of endorsements unless you’re reasonably orthodox.

And that was a good thing. Because we quickly learned that the Christian Post, owned and operated by members of Jang’s community, was perhaps the world’s largest Christian news website, with the formidably Baptist Richard Land as its executive editor. The International Business Times, also owned and operated by members of Jang’s community, was an equally large and popular secular news property. And lots of other popular Christian websites and organizations – Apostolos Campus Ministries, Young Disciples of Jesus, Breathecast, Diakonos, Ecumenical News, Gospel Herald, the Holy Bible Society, Christian Today (not Christianity Today) – as well as secular websites and companies – Veremedia, Veritas Legal Society, Stevens Books, Yibada – were also owned and controlled by members of Jang’s community.

The Christian Post Leadership page reminds me of just how much Christian Leadership in America HAS been and will probably continue being “for sale,” particularly when one campus goes under and there’s money around to bail it out.. (remembering Liberty University, Jerry Falwell, and Sun Myung Moon).  Regardless of the theology (i.e. if you’re not concerned deeply about the divinity of Christ or his earthly representatives), now is not a good time to just “forget” the influence of the international, money-laundering, tax-evading, mass-marriage-making cult (or, religion) famous in the 1970s and 1980s.

One of its True Parents died Sept. 2012 (ironically, around the time of this Christianity Today article the guest blogger is speaking about), but perhaps a philosophical “nephew” got started here, in the 1990s, and is following the usual Christian path — start a college and promote the theology, get accredited, start some major media, and persuades students, their wives, and alumni to sacrifice (i.e., work as volunteers or for below minimum wage, etc.) to sustain the impression of financial viability of one or more of the communications organs of the cult (or, religion).

CP leadership images (of several I recognize), there’s a Billy Graham descendant among them.  I have blogged at least two of these gentlemen (mostly).  However, the most famous names (except, apparently “Land” are not listed as staff, but “Senior Advisory Editors.”  For those listed as actual, looks like, employed editors, there are only a few.

(This image doesn’t show Managing Editor John Grano, or Publisher (looks like quite a young man), or their main religious clout leadership, Richard Land.  It shows the last three editors before one gets to “Senior Advisory.”  Two live in Washington, D.C., and their US Editor (Melissa Barnhart) I see lives in Texas:

Their Political editor (working there since 2011) only got his PhD from UFlorida Gainesville in 2006, and from then until 2011 seems to have been bouncing around (a year here, two years there) on mostly South of the Bible Belt universities (until one in Marietta Ohio), and managed to get a Princeton reference in there — but working, two months, for a  “Junior Statesman Foundation” IN Princeton, and not the University itself.  The work experience thus is Texas, South Carolina, Georgia, and lastly (one year only) Ohio, before joining Christian Post.

Napp Nazworth also has a google-based resume (Current to 2014 only) in somewhat strange format — not for 8X11 printing, obviously).  This is from the post-PhD Work part: (http://www.nappnazworth.com/#my-resume)

Visiting Assistant Professor.  Marietta College, Marietta, Ohio.  Fall 2009—Spring 2010.

Lecturer.  University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.  Fall 2008—Spring 2009.  Taught American Political Parties, Electoral Behavior, Religion and Politics, and Legislative Politics.

AP Government Instructor.  Junior Statesmen Foundation.  Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.  June—July 2008.

Assistant Professor.  Charleston Southern University, Charleston, South Carolina. Fall 2007—Spring 2008.  Taught American Government, State and Local Government, Congress, Parties and Interest Groups, Research Methods, Religion and Politics, and an independent study in Public Policy.

Visiting Professor of Political Science.  Texas A&M University—Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, Texas.  Fall 2005—Summer 2007.  Taught American Government, Religion and Politics, Legislative Process, State and Local Politics, The Constitution and Federalism, The Presidency and Parties and Interest Groups.

Lecturer in Political Science.  Trinity Valley Community College, Athens, Texas.  Summer 2005.  Taught two sections of American and Texas Constitutions and three sections of American and Texas Government.

Lecturer in Political Science.  University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, Texas.  Fall 2004—Spring 2005.  Taught two sections of Congress and Legislation and American Government in the Fall.  Taught American Government, Religion and Politics and a graduate level Research Methods class in the Spring.

Here are the top 3 Christian Post leadership listed, this time I annotated the image:

Click here for the annotations, and/or at the main link if you want to read all the Leadership/Ed. Staff profiles at Christian Post. (annotations updated slightly 2-6-2017).

…Back to the “Internet Monk” quotation by guest blogger Ken Smith, who wrote (with a Ted Oleson) a Christianity Today article on these things. Then the Search-and-destroy critics tactics (reminds me also of Scientology):

Still, there were things about Olivet that bothered me – you can be as big and orthodox as you like and still have problems – and I wrote about those things on my blog. And then I got the chance to write about Olivet threatening to sue me because of that post, and the resulting kerfuffle led to severalmoreposts over the ensuing months. By the spring of 2012, though, I was ready to let the thing drop.

And the blogger concludes, for now, about the media empire and insertion of membership into positions of authority.  I skipped the part about Jang’s early (until 1992) involvement in the Unification Church, and that the group also does arranged marriages, etc.

In a world with Boko Haram and Aum Shinrikyo, who cares about yet another merely petulant Korean Messiah?

I think part of the answer is that Jang’s community punches above its weight. Jang’s followers, regardless of their numbers, are an immensely deep resource pool, and he has put them very effectively to work on his extensive media properties.

But more than that, Jang’s community desperately wants to integrate themselves into American Evangelicalism. To this end, Jang has worked very hard to recruit respectable Evangelical sponsors. William Wagner as the President of Olivet University. Richard Land as the executive editor of the Christian Post, and Will Graham and Joel Hunter and lots of others as vague “Senior Editorial Advisers”. The blessing of Ralph Winter for Olivet’s library. A former editor of Christianity Today teaching theology at Olivet University. And lots more.

Alongside these external recruits, Jang has also worked to place his own people in positions of influence. Jang himself is on the board of the World Evangelical Alliance, and many – maybe even a majority – of the staff of the WEA are members of Jang’s community. Walker Tzeng, one of Jang’s senior leaders, is on the board of the Association for Biblical Higher Education (the standard accrediting organization for US Bible colleges), as well as the board of the National Association of Evangelicals. Nor is this influence limited to the US. When I once called the Christian Council of Korea, the Korean equivalent of the NAE, I was immediately handed off to a member of Jang’s community, who insisted, with growing implausibility, that every Asian investigation of Jang had cleared him, completely, no, really, they did. (Draw your own conclusions about how independent the CCK remains.)

Here’s another way to put it. A community which for years taught that their pastor was a second Messiah now owns some of the world’s largest and most important Christian websites, has built or acquired some of the most well known secular news properties, has virtually taken over one of the world’s oldest Evangelical institutions, and has convinced dozens of senior Evangelical leaders to support them.

What could possibly go wrong?

---

Click on THIS to read annotations, ignore the complaints. I went image-pdf-image (including the added “NOTES”) this time. It does confirm that there is a “Related Transaction” status between Olivet U and IBT Media at least as to the personnel.  Other tax returns acknowledge the above to entities also on Sched-R along with some bookstores (incl. one in North Carolina…).

There’s plenty more to be said on this situation, and on Christian Post.  But not today…

ANYHOW….

To continue my conversation on keeping publication schedules and the burdens (: of being a one-woman outfit here…, Working on the (imminent and upcoming etc.) post was no burden — that’s (in case you haven’t guessed yet) the fun part. Maintaining the quality control while digging in a new field of interest, communicating regarding existing ones, and meeting my own post-production goals of no less than one a week, was, well, reducing the psychological “ROI” of the work.

“How Many Unified City/County Governments are there, and Since When, and Why?  Here’s One (Wyandotte County|KCK, since 1997)” came off an update to a 1/1/2012 post needed to justify publishing a (nearly-ready) post called “2017 Retrospective.”  Allegedly by completing that, I could also publish the “Retrospective” post in good shape.

The 1/1/2012 update had so many inserts, I outsourced first one of them, then another as also an important topic (reflected in the title).  This “interrupt-and-expand” process was repeated on the new (above) one.  Even with a recent blog update (name-change to “FamilyCourtMatters.org” and — why I did it — increase the capacity of its Media Library, which stores the images or pdf files I include in the posts) may not alleviate the need to find another publishing format, soon, for this information.

Olivet U Year 2013 Form 990, Pt VIII (REVENUES) Showing suddenly $5,532,000 “Royalties” Click here for the related “pdf“

Olivet U Year 2014 Form 990 Pt. VIII (Revenues) showing a fraction of Royalties but on Line 2 (Program Service Revs) suddenly $8.2M “Research.” Makes you wonder. Click here for my commentary (related pdf)

So, I had to admit I cannot continue investing personal time tweaking posts in hope they will stick to their assigned publication deadlines AND topics, when public, in-common and private life these days is involved with so many networked financial interests, most (I think it’s fair to say) having acquired their market supremacy and world-changing capacities at least two generations (or about 50 years) ago, or at some levels, 100 years ago.

Speaking of historic timelines…

Meanwhile, for a comparison, women in this country have not yet been able to vote even 100 years, and freed slave MALES, not that much longer. It’s fair and just to say that at most points of “development” of the United States of America, the early phases of development have made sure to disenfranchise MOST (at least half) the population, and then want “extra credit” for changing that, belatedly, and partially.

Women were only belatedly admitted to some of the most elite and “running-the-government” private universities around, such as: Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Cornell, Brown (etc.).   They were sometimes run through separate (and unequal) companion institutions, I guess to keep the elite breeding stock having women to marry and produce heirs to keep the corporate empires going …..  There’s nothing new about the dual forms of discrimination.  Even the ABA in its earlier history was behind state laws in admitting African Americans already holding government positions.  Go read the timeline (it’s in there!)….

(This does have a cumulative effect…)

As to Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964 in “backing off” some forms of racism, it’s been countered by moving venues, I do believe, to places where open confrontation of it was less likely to cause negative publicity, in part because national news doesn’t tend to carry these types of news.  (From what I’ve been able to reconstruct, on the history of HHS, and of certain types of nonprofits involved heavily with HHS funding (that is to say particularly fathers’ rights, children’s rights so-called, and domestic violence or “family violence” prevention) it appears to have moved to the social services/mental health sectors) and transformed the language of discrimination into more “esoteric” terminology, hoping to make it sound as scientific as possible.

Those realms were social science, behavioral (modification) science, psychology, psychiatry, psychoanalysis (which is — let’s be frank about this – to say, “Freud”), mental health etc.  In another time, this might have simply been called “eugenics” but as in the attempt to distance racism from, well, racism, an attempt to distance “sociology’ and social science sectors from, well, basically altered forms of eugenics (population control, breeding practices as of animals with a view towards patriotic impulses for the same).  I still believe that some of this was borrowed from experimentation with the first applications in South and Southwest Africa a century ago, and I’m talking primarily the Germans and the Brits.  I have posted on this over time, and some summaries with links are in text widgets on my sidebar.

I remember being particularly impressed and absorbed by a Chronology of Namibia from Pre-Historic to Independence (Dec. 2000, it reads © 2000-2005 from an civil? engineer Klaus Dierks who lived there, in part for its extensive details and tone.  Main webpage (then click on “Table of Contents”).

Now that I can do screen shots, starting with the early 1800s, through “German Southwest Africa” coming first under League of Nations mandate, then under UN Mandate (administered by South Africa?) followed by attempts of South Africa to incorporate (whats now Namibia), which is protested, and other struggles — the situations change, but the types of issues do not seem to (see Table of Contents link to explore any of the headings shown in image):

Section 3.2, the 1840s (Trade + Missionaries): <==Click to read.

From the 1840s, this is what “colonialism” looks like.  There will be a religious component to justify it where reason or innate need would not. It demands total restructuring along external (here, European) priorities, slaughters wildlife and, eventually, people too (either directly or through attrition — which came later in the history of this area) drains natural resources, discourages or forcibly curtails independence of small social units where they may have been found, wipes out whatever happens to be living in the area (except as found useful for trade), and it has an ultimate goal of control, including of the people, or where not possible through their resistance or attempts to stand their ground, deporting or (as was attempted in this country later, by the Germans) exterminating them.  After the Germans were defeated, then the Allies, wishing to show goodwill, participated (corrected perhaps maybe a century later, in part only) in censoring the detailed records (such as Germans tend to keep) of their own slave labor and extermination camps upon the Nama and Herero people (“the Blue Book” regarding Sharp Island and other camps).    See above image from 3.2, heavily annotated (by me).

COLONIAL/GERMAN RULE (1890) ACTIVE RESISTANCE EGINS. Imperial Germany declares the protectorate a “Crown Colony.” British, hesitant about plans to link the German colony with the Republic of Transvaal, declares Bechuanaland a protectorate, and the eastern borders are regulated following this fait accompli. (chronology/45).

(Same link: Active Resistance Begins: Euro-style dates in chronology, so the timeframe is May (##-05) and June (##-06). Borders and sale of land including mining rights): A sale of land treaty is agreed between the Kharaskhoma-Syndicate and Chief Tseib of the Kharo-!oan in Keetmanshoop. This treaty includes all mining rights. 20.05. Gˆring [Goehring??] writes to Hendrik Witbooi from Okahandja to make peace and to urge him to move from Hornkranz to Gibeon. He further informs Witbooi that the Ovaherero are again under German protection. 29.05. In his reply Hendrik Witbooi informs Gˆring that the Witbooi Nama will maintain their independence. Witbooi is the only leader who consistently refuses to sign a protection treaty with the Germans. 30.05. Hendrik Witbooi writes to Samuel Maharero, stating: “You will eternally regret that you have given your land and your right to rule into the hands of the whites.” 25.06. The Finnish Missionary Society establishes a mission station at Ondangwa. 01.07 (i.e. 1st of July 1890). The Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty is signed by Britain and Germany, whereby Germany accepts the northern high-water line of the Oranje River as the boundary with South Africa…

Resistance Results in Genocide (Chronology.61)..

Yeah, well, the “paternalism continues” to this day in public policy aimed at, again insisting our social space be constructed in a politically correct manner, our children be raised in politically correct manners also, and the emphasis in public discourse on things financial hammers home the debt burden, budget deficit, versus actual, comparable numbers, showing total holdings, income-producing assets, and where the stuff is invested.  YES, it takes work to locate, even think about such things — but consider again.  Regarding this first genocide of the 20th century — what was the motive if not financial profit, exploitation, etc.?  

Credits for an H-Net book review of “WORDS CANNOT TELL” by a History professor? from Georgetown. Posted 2-4-2017. (This was illegible as you can see I posted the text above, far above)

My take on backing off racism in the US is that it was somehow expected that, again, women would sacrifice some of their recently acquired and much appreciated progress (if you will) in work, college, government, and at home in the family.  I don’t know that most women of faith ever truly expected to be fully-“enfranchised” or treated fairly under the traditional millennia-long, or more, “Abrahamic” religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), or other ones from countries with notable caste systems (Hindi or Buddhist, etc.).  In addition, in the 1900s, we have had major operations such as the “Unification Church” involved in significant ways with segments of Christianity (the financing portions in particular), not to mention in international money-laundering, specializing in the use of front-operations, enslaving followers for religious reasons and (as it came out, if you followed the news after Rev. Sun Myung Moon — 8 years after a mock coronation ceremony of him and his wife, “True Parents” in a U.S. Senate (Dirksen) building and involving key U.S. Legislators (including one from Illinois) — went to another place (or, at least, died), the origins of his religious persuasion had close origins in the sexual abuse of young women (see my right sidebar, Vital Links, near the bottom) as a form of purification of the bloodline (or some such).

Throughout many religions, and among politicians, a key polarizing issue is What to do With or To the Women.. and what should “we” or should “we NOT” (ahem) “let them do.”??  Like preach?  Be ordained?  Preach to the opposite gender?  ASSOCIATE unaccompanied by an adult male — in the USA — with the opposite gender?  Marry at will instead of as arranged, and marry outside the religion?  Divorce?  IF they divorce, should they be allowed to retain primary care and legal authority over raising their offspring, or should they made to (a) forfeit the same (look into “covenant marriage” and your looking to penalize whoever leaves the marriage.  Now picture this:  the situation is violent, escalating lethal and someone had to RUN.  Should that person be penalized by forfeiting ever seeing their kids again, or be penalized by having to PAY to see them when the “crime” is saying no to spousal abuse, or abuse of children, or even, continuing marriage to a person when the marriage has become a soul-destroying intolerable?  Some religious sectors, and particularly Catholic sectors (see “Defending Our Father’s House” statement with its Opus Dei signers) still say yes, and have strategies to make this religious “yes” applicable to ALL people in the country, faith-filled or atheist.

In situations where it is so abusive and/or violent and a condition of high, if not extortionist future prospects on a woman who leaves includes leaving her children IN the abusive situation, or having them — which is how it currently works, FYI — then suddenly switched back to it after some freedom FROM it — will those women then just stay, risking (literally in enough cases) death and serious injury, rather than risking lifelong battle for freedom for themselves AND their offspring?  Is this what the USA is to represent?

MEANWHILE:

Some of the upcoming post represents material I’ve known for a long time and am bringing up again as summary (with show-and-tell, as is the style) for reminders.  We still have “The National Fatherhood Initiative” and we still have the AFCC and it’s many strange professionals pushing their themes through, around and in the family court system, BOTH of the above interested in re-framing the concept of domestic violence into something other than what, for those who have been forced to deal with it, it is — and that’s criminal behavior by family members towards other family members.

The National Fatherhood Initiative “just so happened” to be sharing a mailing address including suite#, with a number of entities, two of them looking more like front websites (although they might be legitimate), but one of them having major international connections (REGUS.com) and having just recently (Nov./Dec. 2016) called for an extraordinary shareholders meeting about some listing and jurisdiction changes.

Other of this material is quite new, but is making sense of its place in the “macro” understanding of “how things work” in the USA — what the average citizen ought to understand as at least influencing it.

Who owns which Publication/Telecommunications Outlets came up again in this research. I am particularly interested to remind ALL readers that ANYTHING they read on line has a platform, and it is companies that typically own that platform, and MAJOR companies owning the major media stations, news outlets, and telecommunications media — and they are in all of those businesses for the primary reason corporations exist — that is, to profit their investors, shareholders, and owners.  That is also the reason related tax-exempt philanthropies (so-called) also exist.  Grant-making or not primarily grant-making, they exist so lesser tax is paid on income and revenues produced by assets held, while retaining control of those assets as an overall advantage in (whoever owns them’s) a financial strategy and plan — for the owners, whether a family line, a family line and close associations, or a public/private partnership.

While REGUS, plc and its new owner(?) or manifestation IWG, plc have UK and “Jersey” (as an Island off Great Britain with different financial standards and qualifiers that attracts companies), and the related Financial Adviser “Investec Bank, plc” (put together with “Investec Bank, Ltd.” is a major global influence, the latter originating 1974 in South Africa), there also remains the troubling truth that neither the National Fatherhood Initiative, including with its various trademarks to market its various goods, nor, “case in point” example from the upcoming post, “AFCC” (Association of Family Conciliation —- or Family AND Conciliation — Courts) -the California Chapter, is particularly ethical, consistent, or regular about even staying filed at the state level.

[[added post-publication, I’d omitted the reference to “AFCC” (green font) as to “the California Chapter.”  So far as I know, National Fatherhood Initiatives doesn’t feature state chapters.  The two versions of this chapter’s name (with / without the word ‘AND”) reflects its own ambivalence on IRS tax returns, this century, which the next post, as I recall, demonstrates.  In short, it’s inconsistent even in naming itself on tax returns — and this is a nonprofit over the years whose board typically includes  judges (current or retired), lawyers, LCSWs, LMFTs, and Custody Evaluators, and which last return I saw included (again, fact-check, this is “as I recall”) a Supervising Family Court Commissioner whose parents (lawyers / family law firm) was described as having a “family law dynasty” in San Bernardino County, California!)]]

I mentioned the CAFRs again as the post leading-edge topic about Consolidated City/County Government was obtained from a quotation of an article on this topic from Kansas City, Kansas’ 1997 Consolidation with Wyandotte County, KS (i.e., that “City/County” consolidation), and a short (44pp or so) article on whether or not these consolidations did in fact save local governments money, was citing CAFRs to prove or disprove that point.

I quoted a 2012 exchange between Walter Burien and Carl Herman on the CAFR issue within California, with Carl Herman’s cite, which I’d read several times before and had quoted on this post several times as well (see also dialogues in early 2014 on Burien | Ellen H. Brown, Web of Debt | Green Party candidate for Treasurer, “back when” in California, posted at that time.  I’d submitted a comment to a web page and suddenly found myself the recipient of private emails involving third parties and (seemingly) with the general thrust, “where are you coming from” and an attempt to assess whether I could be turned away from trusting Mr. Burien — when his writing is about the most straightforward around, and I’ve yet to see anyone able to disprove it citing to the governmental financial reports themselves.  What one does with information is one matter, but actually looking at the information precedes it — and somehow the “argument” studiously avoided ever getting to the point of pointing to the evidence and arguing from it.

Which makes me wonder whether people are choosing their beliefs from associations (people they get along with, and can “understand” vs. those they just don’t “get” — who have conflicting information with one’s familiars) or from an awareness of some REAL ground-level truths about, well, accounting, which however it’s tweaked or cooked (at which point, the tweaking or cooking is a  point of discussion) at least involves a language which is comparable across jurisdictions, and across sectors.  In other words, both private corporations and government entities have sources of revenues, operating expenses, capital, liabilities and assets.  The difference is, where these come from and what is and is not taxed or tax-deductible.  Government can be compared to corporate along those lines, as well as within sector.

So, continuing this “Reader Alert” post, when I quoted the June 2012 exchange at CAFR1.com/herman, I clicked on the enclosed “examiner.com” article and saw that the publication had been taken over by another company, the website (which is one thing) labeled AXS.com — but (fine print, footer information), the ownership, which might not even be the most current representation — claims to be AEC, a “wholly-owned subsidiary of The Anschutz Company.

Being who I am, I looked it up, including many business filings which showed me Kansas, Colorado and Delaware entities (The Anschutz COMPANY formed in 1991 Delaware, doing business as ANS Equity, Inc. in Colorado, later became the surviving company of a merger with the 1959ff “Anschutz Corporation” from Kansas.  When the 1959 Anschutz Corporation from Kansas was no longer the “surviving” entity, the name “Anschutz Corporation” became available again in Colorado, so “ANS Equity, Inc.” (at some point a dba of “The Anschutz Company”) took over the Corporation name, and (I still haven’t figured this part of the puzzle out), somehow the Kansas-based “Corporation” relinquished its authority to do business as itself in Colorado, only in October, 2015.

Be that as it may, I got a self-appointed refresher course in this oil-drilling, ranching, rail-road, telecommunications, real estate (of course) and eventually major entertainment/sports powerhouse, under the second major leader figure, who’d started out with his father’s company decades ago, Philip F. Anschutz.

Inbetween and before then, I was attempting to understand the Nov. 2016 prospectus of IWG, plc and WHY such a big point would be made about NOT offering securities in the US, yet it would have a need to retain a US SEC-based securities-exemption (from registration) for its offerings.  IWG stands for “International Workplace Group” and deals with flexible workplaces.  I found that a major financial institution I’d dealt with (US based) was part of a group of investors owning over 5%, and so forth.

Inbetween that mental-sweat-producing, again, self-appointed investigation (as to the US Securities Exchange Commission and international investments between the London and Johannesburg Stock Exchanges, parts and all that — and why a US nonprofit that depends and exploits its original leadership’s connection to federal HHS appointees, that is, the “NFI” — would choose to rent a mailing address from an entity which swears up one side and down the other it is NOT going to allow investments or sale of securities in ANY state of the US, or in the USA)(I assure you that looking up business filings of yet another corporation doesn’t even start to break a mental sweat)  — I was reminded that there is recent campaign to put secession from the United States via a Constitutional Amendment on the State of California. [see “fn1”]  This being an on-line campaign, it has a website (YesCalifornia.org) and as it is a campaign, somewhere there is a company.  I see from the website that the company is called a PAC, haven’t yet located the “PAC” as filed somewhere (though it probably is), but somehow I associated the Corporation “Yes California, Inc.” as related to this campaign — and quickly researched some of its filings, including street address search, which led to some things which didn’t smell (even close to) right about it.

This is reflected in the images near the very top of the post, quoted below.

yes-caliif-bluebk-p21-accepts-400b-state-debt-and-oks-state-share-of-us-debt-talking-budget-not-cafrs-2017-02-02-540pm

Post title and shortlink: How Many Unified City/County Governments are there, and Since When, and Why?  Here’s One (Wyandotte County|KCK, since 1997)

[Note: WordPress-generated shortlinks, unlike web and email addresses, seem to be case-sensitive (if you’re planning to type it, keep the same upper/lower case configuration.  This one ends “5CC” — a separate one generated a few days ago, I noticed ended “5Cc.” ).

---

This moves material from my January 2017 updates to a January 1, 2012 post, in an act of mercy towards the older post, and in the public interest today, about 5 years and 1 month later.

Why of public interest today…

We are First 100 Days of the Trump Presidency, …

(From the introduction “far, far above”):

[fn1] “CALIFORNIA”

**Pardon the drama/elaboration, but this IS how I do view California, regardless of its geographic beauty, commendable diversity of population, and some very fine arts, music of seemingly ALL kinds (particularly jazz, classical had been my interests), theater, etc. available in its major urban areas, and some fine universities, too — not that I’m too favorable to UCBerkeley at this point!) the location of my generation-long nightmare as a woman, mother, wife of batterer I left, thereafter single mother, and before during (to the point it was safe) and after (til it was literally destroyed by the family court process of removing and discrediting what little original safety zone I had on first separating from abuse), working professional in the field I’d gotten the college degree in, and was competent and*** working, that is, producing a living, i.e., independence, in…

***EXCEPT for the repeat interruptions, disruptions, and “Case-churning” of the family/custody/divorce process with such a man (and in the context of some tribal warfare on my own side of the family as I continued to assert my intentions to exercise my legal rights as a U.S. citizen, and raise two children in the household I was literally responsible for, year-round, and year after year up until the day they were stolen and custody was switched, rewarding behavior that in this state, correctly described as to what happened in our case, consisted of a felony.